Mugsy's Walk-Off Bunt said:Are you going to be pissed when Miami passes on Gurley, only to see BB confound the ESPN-ers and snatch him up? (Just mostly kidding.)
sodenj5 said:
I'll only be upset if they draft someone boring like like a guard at 14 and pass on guys like Gurley and Devante Parker.
( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) said:
I don't know much about Miami's roster so I can't comment on if a guard would actually make sense or not. But there is something funny about fans of a team in Miami being disappointed if their draft pick is not as shiny and flashy as possible. Glitz and glamour are what is most important in building a football team.
pdaj said:Soden --
3rd-rounders are hit-and-miss across all teams. That's why, to me, it doesn't make sense for the Fins to trade back for a 3rd, unless they "know" the player they want will still be available. This is also why I won't be terribly upset if Dallas Thomas ends up being a decent backup G/T his entire career. It happens.
I'm completely against using a 1st round pick on a RB, never mind one in the top 1/2. None of the organizations that win consistently use their draft assets in this way; and it's proven time and time again that backs can be taken off the trash heap and be successful. Miami doesn't have the luxury -- either in current talent or in an abundance of picks -- to select a RB with their first-rounder.
I'd much rather see the Fins draft the best available CB/WR on the board, but I'd be fine with G/LB, also. The most important factor for this team's success? Ryan Tannehill's progression. And keeping him upright is a huge component of that. Thus, if La'el Collins is a Dolphin come Thursday night, I won't shed a tear.
I'm hoping Gurley goes top-10, increasing the chances that a better player slides to Miami at 14.
The injury is likely the only reason Miami may have a shot at him at 14. If he closes out the season healthy and goes through the combine and workout process, he's likely being touted as one of the best 2-3 players in the draft and a top 10 overall pick.rymflaherty said:Most of the mocks I've seen don't have the need/value match you'd like to see at #14. If that winds up to be the case next Thursday, I'd have little issue with them selecting Gurley (if he's available).
The injury is a concern, but I'm one who leans toward the "Best College RB since Adrian Peterson" rhetoric being less hyperbolic, and more-so, closer to reality.
If you're thinking along those lines then the lack of impact 1st round RB's isn't really an issue, because you're argument for taking him is that he's superior to every one of those players, across draft classes.
Waynes feels like the beneficiary of an artificially inflated market, basically the total opposite of Gurley. I would understand the pick, but wouldn't be excited about it.CouchsideSteve said:Count me among those who would be against drafting Gurley at 14, for reasons pdaj stated above. This draft is also so deep at WR, I'd prefer to hold off there -- not sure there's a ton of differentiation between a guy like Parker vs. some of the guys you might find available in the second round (e.g., Dorsett or my personal fav, Devin Smith).
Trae Waynes would be atop my wishlist (big, physical corner), and I wouldn't hate it if they traded back to draft Landon Collins. The DB and LB corps still seem really thin to me -- just feels like that is the side of the ball we need to invest in, if there are players on the board that justify the pick (which I expect there will be).
These are fair points.CouchsideSteve said:I don't want to belabor the point, but just a few additional thoughts on why I think Gurley would be a *terrible* investment for this team:
(1) We're thin at multiple positions, and just whiffed on a high pick in 2013 (Jordan) -- now isn't the time to take a gamble at a position where we already have an above-average young player
(2) Gurley is no doubt a risky bet, if for no other reason than there is a non-zero chance he doesn't ever return to form from a major knee surgery (see Dominique Foxworth -- ACL recoveries are far from 100% certainty)
Isn't this all the more reason to draft RBs, since you get their best seasons (whereas if you sign vets you get the downside)?CouchsideSteve said:(3) ACL injury aside, RBs have a shorter shelf life than virtually any other position in the game
The Patriots have used a fair amount of draft capital on RBs (1st in 2006, 2nd and 3rd in 2011), the Ravens used a second on Ray Rice and then paid him big money, the Packers used a 2nd on Eddie Lacy in 2013 and Denver used a 2nd on Montee Ball the same year, the Niners gave Gore a couple big contracts, etc. I don't see these teams as examples of what you're describing.CouchsideSteve said:(5) The RB position is extremely volatile: Spreading your risk across multiple low-cost investments seems to be the most economical approach, as demonstrated by the Patriots, Ravens, Packers, Broncos, 49ers, et al.
Unless you're willing to do this for all positions, I'm not sure how valuable this analysis is. The Super Bowl last year was played between a sixth-rounder and a third-rounder; the leader in passer rating was undrafted; the leader in receptions and receiving yards was a sixth-round pick; the sack leader was a third-rounder; the two leaders in interceptions were a fourth-rounder and undrafted. I'm cherry-picking, but there are draft busts and low-round successes at every position. Is RB worse than other positions? Maybe, maybe not, but you need to contextualize these numbers to be sure.CouchsideSteve said:(6) Just look at where the top-10 rushers over the last five years have been taken in the draft:
So, needless to say, the majority of top NFL running backs aren't first round selections (only 20% of top-3 rushing seasons produced were produced by first rounders in the last 5 years). But I'll grant that isn't necessarily a fair comparison, since there are obviously more RBs being selected in the later rounds.
To fairly evaluate first round picks, let's go player-by-player since 2000:
The ROI for even "sure thing" RBs like Gurley & Melvin Gordon is terrible, which is why NFL teams have shifted away from drafting the position in Round 1.
jsinger121 said:Pats got Jamie Collins at 52 and Dion Jordan pretty much flames out at number 3.
It seems like Wake took him under his wing a bit, but Wake isn't his babysitter. If he's doing drugs and getting suspended, that's on Jordan. It seems so odd because everyone was saying Jordan was a high character guy. I guess you can't always shake what's in your past as his mother had a long history of substance abuse.pdaj said:
You sure know how to kick a man when he's down, haha. We could have had Lane Johnson!
I'll be curious when more "inside info" stars to get reported. There wasn't a defensive vet that could help light a fire under this guy's behind?
The way the Fins' karma has been going, he'll find his groove as soon as he leaves Miami.
Super Nomario said:Isn't this all the more reason to draft RBs, since you get their best seasons (whereas if you sign vets you get the downside)?
Super Nomario said:The Patriots have used a fair amount of draft capital on RBs (1st in 2006, 2nd and 3rd in 2011), the Ravens used a second on Ray Rice and then paid him big money, the Packers used a 2nd on Eddie Lacy in 2013 and Denver used a 2nd on Montee Ball the same year, the Niners gave Gore a couple big contracts, etc. I don't see these teams as examples of what you're describing.
Super Nomario said:Unless you're willing to do this for all positions, I'm not sure how valuable this analysis is. The Super Bowl last year was played between a sixth-rounder and a third-rounder; the leader in passer rating was undrafted; the leader in receptions and receiving yards was a sixth-round pick; the sack leader was a third-rounder; the two leaders in interceptions were a fourth-rounder and undrafted. I'm cherry-picking, but there are draft busts and low-round successes at every position. Is RB worse than other positions? Maybe, maybe not, but you need to contextualize these numbers to be sure.
I think it's great, and really interesting, though it should be probably be split out to its own topic (and possibly combined with some similar discussion that's going on in the OL thread). Obviously I have some quibbles (how does Zach Martin get a solid producer after one season but Travis Frederick is still "jury's out") but we'd probably be plus or minus 10 percentage points on these.CouchsideSteve said:Alright, sorry for dropping a novel into this thread...
I think this is true, but I think the league devaluing RBs has also changed the draft calculus. As the league has become more pass-happy, RB has become less of a premium position, but it took time for the league to catch up. RBs were overdrafted relative to their value until recently, and your analysis reflects that. Are they still being overdrafted? I'm not sure. Pittsburgh (Bell), Green Bay (Lacy), and Cincinnati (Hill and Bernard) arguably got first-round value out of second-round picks. Of course, we've continued to see busts, too. I think a decade ago Gurley and Gordon would have been consensus top-10 picks; now they're being talked about as mid-to-late first-rounders.CouchsideSteve said:We could go back and forth on debating the merits of Gurley as a player himself, but I think I can say with some reasonable certainty that 1st round running backs as a group, have been relatively poor investments over the last 15 drafts. Look no further than the last two drafts as evidence of NFL teams coming to that realization as well. This isn't ground-breaking stuff, but I was honestly surprised at just how spotty the track-record is.
Super Nomario said:Your positional analysis (and the discussion in the OL thread) makes pretty clear that the more premium the position, the higher the bust rate (relative to draft status), and the less premium, the less busty. Which makes sense. You'd take a QB in the first round that was a 50/50 proposition because the upside is so high, but you would never take a guard in the first round that was 50/50. Historically RB was considered premium and the risk profile you describe reflects that; it is no longer clear to me that the position is premium, and it is no longer clear to me that teams treat it as if it is. Obviously, there is some variation, even among smart teams - Seattle has made RB a big priority, and it has worked well for them.
Adam Schefter @AdamSchefter 21s21 seconds ago
Dion Jordan will not appeal his suspension. It stands. Out all of 2015.
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/miami-dolphins/sfl-report-dolphins-dion-jordan-suspended-for-entire-2015-season-20150428-story.html
This latest incident happened weeks ago and was well-known within the Dolphins facility, a source told the Sun Sentinel. It led to Jordan deciding not to practice with the team for voluntary offseason workouts even though he could have continued practicing under league rules.
sodenj5 said:Looking back on Jordan, and the decision to draft him, and how he was handled, it's about as damning as any season's record in terms of how poorly this team has been run.
They move up to select a guy that wasn't a fit for their defensive scheme, and instead of trying to utilize him at his natural position and get something out of him, they stubbornly continue to try and force a square peg into a round hole. I'm not trying to suggest Jordan should receive any slack for his three suspensions, but this coaching staff should receive just as much blame for his failures on the field and not putting him in a position to succeed.
BigSoxFan said:I just took a look back at that 2013 draft first round. There were a whole lot of swings and misses in the first 20 picks.
The 2013 draft was noted as being really thin at the top in terms of elite talent, but very deep in terms of quality players. Miami gambled on taking one of the few elite talents available and proceeded to handle him as poorly as possible, and New England went the other way, playing more to the strength of the draft.Shelterdog said:
Oh weird and the Pats trade back and get a ton of contributors.
It's also funny that some of the most reviled picks-Fredricks and Kyle Long--are some of the most successful.
sodenj5 said:Looking back on Jordan, and the decision to draft him, and how he was handled, it's about as damning as any season's record in terms of how poorly this team has been run.
They move up to select a guy that wasn't a fit for their defensive scheme, and instead of trying to utilize him at his natural position and get something out of him, they stubbornly continue to try and force a square peg into a round hole. I'm not trying to suggest Jordan should receive any slack for his three suspensions, but this coaching staff should receive just as much blame for his failures on the field and not putting him in a position to succeed.
smastroyin said:Yeah, it's one thing if they had the pick and instead of trading down took a shot and missed. They traded up in a sketchy draft to get their guy and he has been useless and was always going to be useless in their scheme without a significant change to his playing style.
https://twitter.com/rapsheet/status/593840043019673600pdaj said:Any predictions for tonight, fellas? I'm going with the Gurley rumors as being a smokescreen.
Here's my guess of the Top 3 possible options:
1) Trade up for Parker.
2) Parker slips to 14; if not, draft Trae or Johnson.
3) Possible trade down; draft Johnson, Perriman, or Collins.
Ummmsodenj5 said:It's shaping up like both Parker and Gurley might be there...
DeVante Parker
Though Parker is by no means a perfect prospect, he still might be underrated. He was Teddy Bridgewater’s favorite target during their joint Louisville days, and last season, Parker returned from the injury that cost him the first half of the season and ripped off five 100-yard receiving performances in six games despite occasionally woeful quarterback play.
Athleticism: Parker doesn’t quite warrant the “freak” label like White, but at 6-3, 209 pounds, he’s a unique athlete with pSPARQ scores in the 76th percentile and a well-rounded athletic web.
Where he wins: Though he’s not particularly polished, Parker is built like a classic do-everything wideout. If he properly develops, he should be able to win everywhere on the field, whether by banging with the big bodies against zones or beating corners in press-man. He’s pretty good after the catch, too.
Weaknesses: Parker isn’t a blazer, and in addition to concerns about his pure speed, his biggest issues are technique and refinement. Parker relies on his natural ability as much as any receiver in the draft, but he’ll have to become far more precise with his releases and routes in the NFL.
Bottom line: Parker isn’t as graceful or as sure-handed as Beckham, but I wouldn’t be shocked if he matches ODB’s feat of delivering a better rookie year than the guys picked ahead of him.
I really liked the idea of DeVante Parker to Minnesota at No. 11, and I think the Dolphins had to be tickled to see him not only get past No. 11, but then also fall past Cleveland at No. 12. I've made the A.J. Green comparison before, and while that's a bit lofty, I do think based on body type, athleticism and catch radius -- as well as surprising juice after the catch -- he was exactly what the Dolphins needed to help Ryan Tannehill.